DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fed Gets It Right ... for the Right Reason?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fed Gets It Right ... for the Right Reason? AUG Market Update 2019 The Fed Gets It Right ... for the Right Reason? Ronald Temple, CFA, Managing Director, Co-Head of Multi-Asset and Head of US Equity David Alcaly, CFA, Research Analyst On 31 July, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) cut its target for the federal funds rate by 25 basis points (bps), com- pleting an about-face that began last year. Over the past seven months, the FOMC has moved from hiking rates, to remaining “patient,” to acting “as appropriate to sustain the expansion,” despite limited evidence of unexpected economic weakness. At the same time, the Federal Reserve has launched a review of its strategy, tools, and communications, focused in large part on the chal- lenges low interest rates, low growth, and low inflation pose for monetary policy. We believe that the FOMC has made the right decision in reducing rates. As we have long argued, the case for hiking rates aggres- sively last year was weak and there are clear benefits to running a “high pressure economy.” Furthermore, the risks surrounding inflation remain to the downside—core PCE inflation has hit the target of 2% in just 6 of the past 86 months. The combination of the FOMC’s pivot in short-term policy with the broader review of how the Fed makes policy more generally suggests that the Committee might have come around to this point of view and narrowly averted a policy mistake. We recognize that unpredictable trade policy could change the economic environment. That said, while there are some pockets of weakness, we believe the US outlook remains solid and has not changed dramatically since December. Current conditions suggest that a reasonable argument can be made for a few “insurance cuts,” but not a full easing cycle. We believe the FOMC should support con- tinued growth to secure the continued benefits from tight labor markets and to aspire to a period of above-target inflation, in keeping with the theoretical “symmetry” in its inflation target. However, despite an emphasis on transparency, the FOMC has had a lot of trouble explaining its pivot. Both at the beginning and at the end it has had to walk back statements that were misinterpreted by markets. We expect continued market uncertainty about the number of rate cuts ahead, with investors focused on the Fed’s busy speaking schedule. We hope that the results of the Fed’s review—expected in early 2020—add clarity by demonstrating that the Fed is adopting a new policy framework with more emphasis on supporting maximum employment and raising inflation, rather than containing it. We also would advocate a new communications framework focused on higher quality, rather than higher frequency, communications. The Right Decision ... We have long believed the argument for aggressive rate hikes was weak, and that the FOMC ought to want to realize above-target inflation on a sustained basis before tightening policy. Our view is mainly based on three factors: 1) the expansion has been weak; 2) there are significant labor market benefits from allowing the economy to “run hot;” and 3) there is little risk of undesirably high inflation. First, the recovery from the global financial crisis has been slow and weak. The actions taken by the Fed limited the financial crisis’s severity and contributed to what is now the longest US expansion since at least the 1850s. Fiscal stimulus also helped initially, but was too small and was withdrawn too quickly. However, growth in both real GDP per working age population and in total nonfarm payroll employment has been slower this expansion than in all other postwar expansions, with the exception of the pre-crisis expan- sion—itself a disappointment. As a result, estimates of both the level and the growth rate of potential output are lower today than they were before the crisis. For example, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate of potential US real GDP is more than 10% below its pre-crisis estimate LR32041 2 (Exhibit 1). This implies that more should have been done to support growth and that doing too little may have reduced future growth and Exhibit 1 Estimates of Potential Output Have Been Heavily Cut economic well-being, through foregone investment, sustained under- US Real GDP employment, and depressed labor force participation. (1Q 2001=100) Second, there have been clear labor market benefits from running what 160 Janet Yellen called a “high pressure economy,”1 reversing some of these effects. A range of measures suggest that much of the potential work- 140 force was slow to benefit from the recovery, but has since experienced improved prospects as the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest 120 level in nearly five decades. For example, a large number of people withdrew from the labor force entirely following the crisis, a dynamic 100 not captured by the unemployment rate, which only measures individu- 80 als actively looking for work. While separating cyclical trends from 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019E 2022E structural trends is complicated, the share of prime age (25–54) adults in US Real GDP CBO Estimate of Potential Real GDP, Jan 2007* the labor force bottomed in 2014 for men and in 2015 for women. The CBO Estimate of Potential Real GDP, Jan 2019 decline since has returned 0.6 million men and 1.3 million women to As of March 2019 the labor force (Exhibit 2). Similarly, the share of prime age adults not * Original value in chained 2000 US dollars. Adjusted based on 1Q 2000 output gap. in the labor force due to illness or disability rose by over a percentage Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Congressional Budget Office, Haver Analytics point from 2001 to 2014, but has since declined.2 The FOMC’s economic projections demonstrate an evolving understanding that tight labor markets are more sustainable than Exhibit 2 previously thought. The lowest FOMC projection of the longer-run Tighter Labor Markets Are Drawing People Back into the Workforce unemployment rate increased from 4.5% in January 2009 to 5.2% Labor Force Participation Rate in late 2013 and early 2014, before many of the benefits of tighter labor markets were realized. Since then, the median FOMC projec- (Pre-Crisis Peak =100) 101 tion of the longer-run unemployment rate has declined to 4.2% and the lowest FOMC projection has fallen to 3.6%. At his 31 July 2019 100 press conference, Chair Jerome Powell explicitly acknowledged the Female, Age 25–54 benefits tight labor markets were having: 99 Wages have been rising, particularly for lower-paying jobs. People who live and work in low- and middle-income 98 communities tell us that many who have struggled to find work are now getting opportunities to add new and better chapters to their lives. This underscores for us the importance 97 of sustaining the expansion so that the strong job market Male, Age 25–54 reaches more of those left behind.3 96 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 Third, we believe the risks surrounding inflation are clearly to the As of July 2019 downside. The experience of the “Great Inflation” of the late 1960s– Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Haver Analytics early 1980s has biased Fed policy toward “getting ahead of the curve” based on the idea that being too tolerant of tight labor markets could lead to rapidly accelerating inflation, forcing drastic rate hikes that subsequently cause a recession. These risks are very low today. The Exhibit 3 Great Inflation took time to develop and occurred under far different Core PCE Inflation Last Hit 3% in 1992 circumstances. The last time core PCE inflation was as high as 3% was Personal Consumption Expenditures Less Food and Energy in 1992, during its decline from that episode (Exhibit 3). This cycle, YoY Change (%) 12 core PCE has only hit the Fed’s target of 2% in six months since April 2012, all in mid-2018. It has since moved in the wrong direction, fall- ing to 1.6% even as labor markets tightened further. Furthermore, the 9 slow recovery in the United States, as well as even slower growth and weaker inflation in other advanced economies, strongly suggests that 6 inflation pressures are weak globally. There also is every reason to believe that the Fed could easily con- 3 tain inflation if necessary. Inflation has been relatively insensitive to changes in the unemployment rate in recent decades. It is highly 0 unlikely that it will accelerate uncontrollably, much less that this 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 2019 would happen suddenly and from such a low level. Interest rates As of June 2019 remain very low, suggesting that small rate hikes could slow activity. Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Haver Analytics And the Fed has an unlimited ability to tighten policy. The much 3 more worrisome future constraint is its limited ability to cut rates and implement other unconventional policies in a recession, a limitation Exhibit 4 Markets Were More Dovish than the FOMC that is exacerbated by persistently low inflation. Projected Fed Funds Rate All of these points suggest the FOMC should maintain easy policy (%) even as labor markets continue to tighten, at least until above-target 3 inflation is realized on a sustained basis. In fact, rather than seeking to “get ahead of the curve,” the FOMC should want to see higher infla- tion. This idea is implicit in some of the monetary policy strategies 2 currently under the Fed’s review, such as average inflation targeting or price level targeting. We hope the FOMC’s pivot in short-term policy, combined with the broader review of how the Fed makes policy, 1 reflects that the Committee has come around to this point of view Jan 18 Jul 18 Jan 19 Jul 19 Jan 20 Jul 20 while avoiding a policy mistake.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Former Fed Chiefs Weigh In
    JULY 17 2020 Former Fed chiefs weigh in Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen have hardly been quiet since they left their positions as heads of the Federal Reserve. Whether in media, articles or, recently, as part of a group of 150 economists who wrote a letter to Congress, the two have remained public figures. It has been some time since they testified before lawmakers, however. Appearing twice a year to committees in both the House and the Senate was part of the job back then; Friday marked the first required appearances for each since they left their posts. Paige Wilhelm Given Yellen and Bernanke’s support for Jerome Powell, the current Fed Senior Vice President Senior Portfolio Manager chair, it is no surprise they praised the Fed’s actions so far in the crisis or Federated Investment Counseling that they echoed his call for Congress to provide more fiscal support to the economy. The overarching message for lawmakers was do not worry about the deficit at this time—the economy needs assistance now. One thing is certain, the Fed is not worried about its own balance sheet. This week it revealed that figure now stands at more than $7 trillion. Interestingly, the special purpose vehicles it created in the height of the crisis in March are hardly being used now. These include the Primary Dealer Credit Facility and the Money Market Liquidity Facility. This is a good sign, as it means the liquidity markets are functioning well on their own. But the greater economy probably will require Congress’s assistance to do the same.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Fed Too Active?
    OPINION BY KARTIK ATHREYA Is the Fed Too Active? ome observers have recently voiced concern that Fed So the goal of redressing at least some aspects of activities in the areas of climate change and inequal- economic inequality has long been a Fed concern. Indeed, Sity may put the institution at risk. In a forthcoming the Richmond Fed strives to understand the full range of Duke Law Journal article, for instance, Christina Parajon economic outcomes of Fifth District residents, including Skinner of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School inequities, and among them, those that occur along racial argues that the Fed must avoid the temptation to engage in lines. To fail here would hinder our ability to fulfill our “central bank activism” by pushing its powers beyond the mandate under the CRA and to provide better informa- text and purpose of its legal mandate to address “imme- tion via the Beige Book and other means to guide mone - diate public policy problems” such as climate change tary policy. As Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin and economic inequality. She cautions, “Activism under- has pointed out, “The regional Fed banks are charged mines the legitimacy of central bank authority, with understanding the dynamics within our erodes its political independence, and ultimately “We should districts. In pursuit of that goal, we have been renders a weaker central bank.” In a recent Wall investing in research that addresses these Street Journal op-ed, Michael Belongia of the always strive to issues and the racial inequities that result.” University of Mississippi and Peter Ireland of understand forces Lately, the connection between mone- Boston College voiced similar concerns about Fed that plausibly tary policy and economic inclusion has drawn activities in the area of income inequality.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript of Chair Powell's Press Conference -- January 29, 2020
    January 29, 2020 Chair Powell’s Press Conference FINAL Transcript of Chair Powell’s Press Conference January 29, 2020 CHAIR POWELL. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for being here. At today’s meeting, my colleagues and I decided to leave our policy rate unchanged. As always, we base our decisions on our judgment of how best to achieve the goals Congress has given us: maximum employment and price stability. We believe monetary policy is well positioned to serve the American people by supporting continued economic growth, a strong job market, and a return of inflation to our symmetric 2 percent goal. The expansion is in its 11th year, the longest on record. Growth in household spending moderated toward the end of last year, but with a healthy job market, rising incomes, and upbeat consumer confidence, the fundamentals supporting household spending are solid. In contrast, business investment and exports remain weak, and manufacturing output has declined over the past year. Sluggish growth abroad and trade developments have been weighing on activity in these sectors. However, some of the uncertainties around trade have diminished recently, and there are some signs that global growth may be stabilizing after declining since mid-2018. Nonetheless, uncertainties about the outlook remain, including those posed by the new coronavirus. Overall, with monetary and financial conditions supportive, we expect moderate economic growth to continue. The unemployment rate has been near half-century lows for well more than a year, and the pace of job gains remains solid. Participation in the labor force by people in their prime working years, ages 25 to 54, is at its highest level in more than a decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet the New Boss, Same As the Old Boss (Part II)
    Samuel Miller CFA, CAIA Senior Analyst Deron T. McCoy CFA, CFP®, CAIA, AIF® Chief Investment Officer Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss (Part II) Four years ago in our December 2013 SEIA Report titled, “The Federal Reserve: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss”, we offered reasons why analyzing the human makeup of the Board is so important (hint: they more or less set monetary policy for the world, affecting global capital markets everywhere). We opined that the new incoming Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen was very much in line with her predecessor and that her appointment was a “signal to all investors that easy monetary policy will be the policy of choice for the foreseeable future” and “short-term interest rates might be low for another three years extending through 2016.” We concluded by stating “Yellen’s policies should support ‘risk assets’ (Equities, High Yield Bonds, etc.) in the near term with her hopeful goal of higher inflation and economic overheating (not a typo) four years out which will in turn convolute her reappointment process (in 2017).” Four years have now passed and while we can claim victory on our assessment of the stock market, our view of an overheated economy came up a bit short. As such, the reappointment process caused nary a ripple in global markets as the new-new boss is the same as the old-old boss. Who is Jerome Powell? On November 2, 2017, President Trump nominated Jerome “Jay” Powell to be the next Fed chair, providing clarification for the market and lessening monetary policy uncertainty in the near and intermediate term.
    [Show full text]
  • Regime Change Q2 2018 COMMENTARY
    Chief Market Strategist, Dr. Quincy Krosby Prudential Financial Regime Change Q2 2018 COMMENTARY The second quarter— Highlights which statistically • Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell takes the helm is not the most • A brief history of recent regime changes at the Federal Reserve • The market enters a period of crosscurrents hospitable in terms of returns—should enjoy Q2 OPENING BELL solid growth here The term “regime change” is currently trending in the headlines, from “More expect Venezuela will collapse and have regime change within 12 months” to “Pushing back against Iran: Is it time and abroad; solid, if for regime change?” As we enter the second quarter of 2018, however, the term is increasingly not stellar, earnings; used to describe a subtle but equally important shift in economic policy. Monetary policy stands out as a significant economic catalyst, and with the departure of Federal Reserve Chair Janet the fiscal stimulus Yellen, we’ve seen headlines blare: “How to survive the regime change in markets.” beginning to filter into Referring to February’s market correction, triggered by fears that inflation was beginning to assert itself, the Financial Times succinctly stated: “Whether correction turns into regime the real economy; and change is down to the Fed.” But do members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) a Federal Reserve of the Federal Reserve view their job as protectors of stock market performance, the way they seemingly did coming out of the financial crisis? that wants to maintain Newly installed Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, greeted on his first official day with a 4 percent the “middle ground” market sell-off, appeared upbeat about prospects for the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fed and the Economic Outlook
    The Fed and the Economic Outlook Mark L. J. Wright Research Director Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis March 28, 2018 Disclaimer The views expressed are my own and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis or the Federal Reserve System. minneapolisfed.org Today’s Talk . Overview of the Federal Reserve System and of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis . Discuss the national economy and the thinking behind recent monetary policy decisions . Compare national economy to: . State economies of Minnesota and Wisconsin . Twin Cities metro economy The Federal Reserve System The Federal Reserve System . Central bank of the U.S. Established by Act of Congress in 1913 . Two previous U.S. central banks: . First Bank of the United States (1791-1811) Promoted by Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury . Second Bank of the United States (1816-1836) Ended when President Andrew Jackson vetoed reauthorization of the bank Responsibilities of the Federal Reserve System . Supervise and regulate banks . Mainly large bank holding companies . JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup . Provide financial services . Manage (‘clear’) financial payments . Help banks meet short-term demands for cash . “Lender of Last Resort” . Set monetary policy Structure of the Federal Reserve System 12 “District” banks carry out operating duties of Federal Monetary Reserve policy BOG Chair, Jerome Powell The Federal Reserve Banks Minneapolis Fed’s Ninth District The Minneapolis Fed’s job is to: • Supervise banks & offer financial services in this district • Monitor developments in this regional economy • Represent the interests of the 9th district when monetary policy is set in Washington D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • November 23, 2020 the Hon. Jerome Powell, Chairman Federal Reserve
    November 23, 2020 The Hon. Jerome Powell, Chairman Federal Reserve 20th Street and Constitution Ave NW Washington, D.C. 20551 Dear Chairman Powell: On two occasions I have written to you highlighting the terrible plight faced by cities and states being bled into bankruptcy fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.i As the crisis intensifies and more municipalities find their bond ratings downgraded, I write to you for a third time year pleading with the Federal Reserve to do more. Your continued failure to act with all available tools may have cataclysmic consequences for Americans for decades to come. As you are most likely aware, thousands of state and local government issuers have been placed on negative credit watch in 2020 largely due to the pandemic. Fitch’s recent credit report states that 1,343 issuers have had a negative credit revision this year, and $83 billion of debt has been downgraded.ii My own state of New Jersey also was downgraded earlier this month.iii Transportation issuers have been particularly hard hit, as evidenced by the two-notch downgrade of New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s bonds. If our cities and states do not get substantial and sustained help soon, the impacts will be devastating – and borne almost entirely by regular Americans. An extended years-long recovery period will force municipalities to make unbearable cuts. Police and fire departments, road building and maintenance, teachers and social workers, and scores of other services upon which Americans rely on absolutely could be slashed or cut entirely. Public transit, particularly trains and buses, are especially vulnerable because more Americans are working from home and the increased danger of virus spread through enclosed travel have decimated transportation programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Reserve Docket No. R–1723 and RIN 7100–AF94, Community Reinvestment Act
    BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION February 15, 2021 Ann E. Misback, Secretary Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 20th St., and Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20551 RE: Federal Reserve Docket No. R–1723 and RIN 7100–AF94, Community Reinvestment Act Dear Ms. Misback: I am encouraged by and appreciate the Board’s effort to engage community stakeholders and accept comment letters as part of the rulemaking process to modernize the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). Through this process, we should seek to create more opportunities for banks to promote economic development and provide access to capital. I am concerned that any change to the presumption of “promoting economic development” for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Rural Business Investment Companies (RBICs) and the U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Small Business Investment Companies (SBICs) will significantly limit access to capital for small businesses and the formation of government certified/licensed job creation programs such as the RBICs and SBICs. • Question 57. What other options should the Board consider for revising the economic development definition to provide incentives for engaging in activity with smaller businesses and farms and/or minority-owned businesses? On January 27, 2021, Federal Reserve Board of Governors (FED) Chairman Jerome Powell said that the top priority for the FED is to obtain maximum employment. The proposed revision to the economic development definition would bring dramatic and significant consequences to funding of Federal job creation and economic development programs including the RBIC and SBIC, among others. Economic development programs structured and administered by Federal agencies should continue to qualify for CRA credit for all banks.
    [Show full text]
  • Fed's Kashkari Still Believes Rate Increases Are A
    12/3/2018 Fed’s Kashkari Still Believes Rate Increases Are a Bad Idea - WSJ DOW JONES, A NEWS CORP COMPANY DJIA 25802.04 1.03% ▲ Nasdaq 7431.99 1.38% ▲ U.S. 10 Yr 232 Yield 2.986% ▲ Crude Oil 53.13 4.32% ▲ Euro 1.1343 0.21% ▲ This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit https://www.djreprints.com. https://www.wsj.com/articles/feds-kashkari-still-believes-rate-increases-are-a-bad-idea-1543833000 U.S. ECONOMY Fed’s Kashkari Still Believes Rate Increases Are a Bad Idea President of Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis says strong, sustained job gains indicate full employment not yet reached Neel Kashkari, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, speaking during a presentation in March 2017. PHOTO: ANDREW HARRERBLOOMBERG NEWS By Michael S. Derby Dec. 3, 2018 530 a.m. ET Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari again made the case to hold off on interest-rate increases, warning that the U.S. central bank could inadvertently push the economy into recession if it continues boosting borrowing costs. “I’m still there. Nothing has changed,” Mr. Kashkari said of his opposition to rate increases. “Let’s just step back and see what the economy presents us” before acting again, he said Friday in a Wall Street Journal interview. Mr. Kashkari has been one of the Fed’s strongest critics of its campaign to push short-term rates higher. The central bank has been raising the cost of short-term borrowing since the end of 2015, when its target rate was close to zero.
    [Show full text]
  • The Next Federal Reserve Chair: YOU’RE HIRED!!! Boyd Nash-Stacey / Nathaniel Karp 25 October 2017
    Central Banks The Next Federal Reserve Chair: YOU’RE HIRED!!! Boyd Nash-Stacey / Nathaniel Karp 25 October 2017 The FOMC is poised to undergo a nontrivial change in leadership and composition with four new regional Fed members rotating into voting roles and with a potential change in leadership. There are also three additional governor’s seats— previously four prior to the confirmation of Randy Quarles— and potentially four vacancies –depending if Chair Yellen stays- that President Trump could fill. In terms of timing, the White House has alluded that they will announce their nominee for chair before President Trump leaves for his Asia trip on November 3rd. That said, timing is less valuable than impact, as a misstep from the administration on the selection of the next Fed chair has the potential to disrupt markets and create unnecessary monetary policy uncertainty domestically and globally. Choosing a candidate that will maintain integrity and independence of the Fed is vital to continuing the stability and prosperity that the U.S. has achieved in recent decades. Although, it predates many Millennials, there was a time in recent history where political pressures influenced the Fed’s decision-making, which favored full employment over price stability, leading to increased accommodation despite many signs that the economy was operating at or above capacity. This atypical policy course led to steep increases in inflation in the 1970s and 1980s, which required significant increases in interest rates and were accompanied by economic recessions in later years. A group of academics, bankers, governors, lawyers and the incumbent have risen to the top of the list of candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • Fed Resists the Doves
    Brian S. Wesbury – Chief Economist Robert Stein, CFA – Dep. Chief Economist Strider Elass – Economist November 2, 2017 • 630.517.7756 • www.ftportfolios.com Fed Resists the Doves The after effects of hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria 60% in Treasury securities and 40% in mortgage-related have done little to sway the opinion of Federal Reserve securities.) members that the economy is ready for further rate hikes. While leaving rates unchanged at today’s meeting - as With today’s statement in the books, focus is now on expected - they set the table for December. The Fed President Trump’s announcement of the next Federal essentially waved off the hurricane-related September Reserve Chair, expected later this week. According to payrolls declines, and more notably strengthened rhetoric reports from the Wall Street Journal, current Fed Governor about economic growth, which they now characterize as Jerome Powell will be nominated for the position, beating “rising at a solid rate” compared to September’s “rising out Vice President Mike Pence’s top choice (and ours too), moderately.” Meanwhile the Fed added text noting a Stanford Professor John Taylor. The question now is if pickup in business fixed investment over recent quarters. Taylor will be selected to fill the Vice-Chair position left In fact, it’s hard to find much in today’s statement that open following Stanley Fischer’s departure in October. would put a December rate hike in doubt. There were no dissents from today’s statement, not even Despite the hawkish tone of the statement, market odds of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari, who has made a December rate hike were little changed following the dovish comments and voiced dissent to further rate hikes statement, moving to 87.5% from 82.8% two days ago.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Jerome Powell Know That William Mcchesney Martin Didn’T—And What Role Did Academic Research Play in That?
    What does Jerome Powell know that William McChesney Martin didn’t—and what role did academic research play in that? by Alan S. Blinder, Princeton University Griswold Center for Economic Policy Studies Working Paper No. 259, September 2019 Keynote lecture at the Money Macro and Finance Research Group’s 50th Anniversary Conference, London School of Economics, September 4-6, 2019. Forthcoming in The Manchester School. I thank Roger Ferguson, Chris Sims, and Janet Yellen for helpful conversations, but none of them is implicated in the opinions expressed here. It is indeed a pleasure for an old LSE alumnus like me (M.Sc., 1968) to return to help mark the 50th anniversary of the Money Macro and Finance Research Group. I actually have on my bookshelf a copy of Harry Johnson’s 1972 book, Macroeconomics and Monetary Theory (Johnson, 1972), which was based on his lectures at LSE during the 1969-1970 academic year. I presumably heard some of these lectures as a student two years earlier. But fifty years is a long time and memory fails. The world changes in 50 years. In 1969, the New York Jets won the Superbowl of American football and the New York Mets won the World Series of baseball—two huge upsets in the same year! The former has never reoccurred; the latter has been repeated only once. The year 1969 is perhaps most famous for astronaut Neil Armstrong’s walk on the moon—a remarkable feat that was accomplished five more times, but not since 1972. However, some aspects of the world don’t change much in a half-century.
    [Show full text]